But it still trails Google's Chrome browser by a wide margin -- 55 percent of web usage for Chrome compared to 6 percent for Firefox, according to StatCounter's measurements -- and Firefox is a rare sight in the crucial mobile market.

Yes, it's quite likely a bunch of people will have tried the new Firefox and then gone back to their default. I did the same with Vivaldi and Opera (Chromium) but continued with Firefox as default. It's still my default, although I'm now using Opera more. I'm probably 50-50 in usage between the two now. I find that no one browser is better than all others in every respect, so have a bunch installed and may switch occasionally for certain tasks.

tomatoshadow2 wrote:Didn't we add a ton of users lately with Quantum? I thought I read an article, that mentioned that.

With Mozilla spending the whole of October and half of November making sure that the entire tech press were on message with their 'Twice As Fast!' stuff, it would have been a miracle if downloads hadn't dramatically increased. Just because people would want to see what all the fuss was about. That's called curiosity and doesn't mean people are going to use it or switch over, especially when they find it's not as fast as claimed.

It's the same old Mozilla trick that they have been using for over 10 years now - to make something look good, then quote the Download figures (they have a few different ways of calculating that, including guessing). To make something look bad then quote the ADU (Average Daily User) figures and they have around 4 ways to calculate that.

For example, 20 - 30% only use Firefox at work and not at the weekends, so you can make legacy extensions/themes look bad just by taking 7 days (including weekends) and averaging that and calling that the ADU. ....and there's you thinking it meant average across a day.

***

From the OP link -

Mozilla's revenue soared to $520 million in 2016, the last year for which financial information is available, but the organization doesn't have infinite resources....

Well, it does sort of have around 2 years worth - $329,774,000 (as of Dec. 31st 2016) - of infinite resources.

For the last 10 years, Mozilla's incomings have far exceeded their outgoings. The difference gets invested as stocks, bonds, copper futures, etc. Just a glance at its audited accounts tells you that.

It also tells you that very little ever gets donated out again from that investment portfolio.

Just a little something to remember the next time you see one of Mozilla's donation pleas.

Metal Lion latest SeaMonkey & Thunderbird Themes - Sea Monkey and Silver Sea Monkey"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke (attrib.)

tomatoshadow2 wrote:Yeah makes sense forsure @Frank Lion, enjoy your insight as always when I come here daily. By the way, might be off topic guys, what are your opinions on the Mr.Robot extension mishap, what happened?

The same thing that always happens, PR people bypassed the development process and got chastised for it.

For now there's the Rust refactoring so Firefox isn't yet on its last legs. Unless something political comes up and all the actually-working developers get purged or quit en masse in disgust and flock elsewhere. Like Brave.

For now there's the Rust refactoring so Firefox isn't yet on its last legs. Unless something political comes up and all the actually-working developers get purged or quit en masse in disgust and flock elsewhere. Like Brave.